Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 6, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 20110037599 A1; February 17, 2011) in view of Schmidt (US 2010/0127173 A1; May 27, 2010).
Regarding claim 1, Johnson teaches a system for monitoring presence of one or more target gases (Paragraph 25 -FIG. 1 provides a general overview of a system 100 for providing real time locating and gas exposure monitoring.) at one or more installation sites (Paragraph 44 - he network environment 200 may include one or more users 120A-N, gas detection and locating devices ("badges") 220A-N, network components 225A-N,), wherein the system comprising:
a plurality of gas sensor systems, each gas sensor system comprising a data acquisition and a processing unit (Paragraph 27- The users 120A-N may each wear a gas detection and locating device, such as a badge or tag, which may include a sensor for monitoring the exposure of the users 120A-N to the hazardous materials, such as hazardous gases or chemical compounds. The badge may include a hazardous gas sensor, a locating device, and an interface, such as a network interface.) configured to:
capture information of the one or more target gases in real-time (Paragraph 25 - FIG. 1 provides a general overview of a system 100 for providing real time locating and gas exposure monitoring.);
associate each information with a location at which the one or more target gases are present (Paragraph 30 - The badge may further include a location processor, such as a positioning system processor, for determining information describing the location of a user A 120A and communicating the location information to the central server.); and
transmit information associated with the one or more target gases and location data associated with the location of the one or more target gases to a central server (Paragraph 30 - The badge may further include a location processor, such as a positioning system processor, for determining information describing the location of a user A 120A and communicating the location information to the central server.).
Johnson does not teach a plurality of infrared (IR) imaging systems, each IR imaging system comprising a data acquisition and a processing unit configured to:
capture infrared images of the one or more target gases in real-time; associate each captured infrared image with a location at which the one or more target gases are present; and
transmit image data associated with the one or more target gases and location data associated with the location of the one or more target gases to a central server.
Schmidt teaches teach an infrared (IR) imaging systems, each IR imaging system comprising a data acquisition and a processing unit configured to:
capture infrared images of the one or more target gases in real-time (Paragraph 18 - FIG. 1 shows an example of a typical scenario 100 in which an infrared camera or any other type of infrared detecting element 110 can be used to detect a gas leak 150 from a pipe 120 or any other gas-containing equipment.);
associate each captured infrared image with a location at which the one or more target gases are present (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.); and
transmit image data associated with the one or more target gases and location data associated with the location of the one or more target gases to a central server (Paragraph 39 - In one embodiment, the infrared imaging data processing system 200B can transmit processed data to another device, server, and/or database.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Regarding claim 2, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson further teaches wherein the central server in data communication with the plurality of gas detecting systems, wherein the central server is configured to associate the image data from the plurality of gas detecting systems to generate an organization-wide mapping of gas leaks at the one or more installation sites (Paragraph 125 - T In operation, the operator 110 may use the map display 1310 to view the location of the users 120A-N outside of the workplace 1330. The users 120A-N may be located remotely from the workplace 1330, or may be located in an area of the workplace outside of the sensor network.).
Johnson does not teach wherein the central server in data communication with the plurality of IR imaging systems, wherein the central server is configured to associate the image data from the plurality of IR imaging systems to generate an organization-wide mapping of gas leaks at the one or more installation sites
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Regarding claim 3, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson further teaches wherein the central server is configured to process the image data received from each gas detection system from the plurality of gas detection systems to detect the one or more target gases (Paragraph 27 - The interface may transmit data describing the amount of hazardous gas a user A 120A has been exposed to, and the location of the user A 120A, to a central server.; Paragraph 28 - Alternatively or in addition, users 120A-N in a nuclear power plant work environment may wear a radiation detector and locating device.).
Johnson does not teach IR imaging systems.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Regarding claim 5, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1.
Johnson further teaches wherein the processing unit is configured to process gas detection data to detect the one or more target gases (Paragraph 56 - In operation, a gas sensor in a badge A 220A may detect the level of exposure of a user A 120A to one or more hazardous gases. Paragraph 30 - The badge may further include a location processor, such as a positioning system processor, for determining information describing the location of a user A 120A and communicating the location information to the central server. ).
Johnson does not teach the processing unit is configured to process the image data to detect the one or more target gases.
Schmidt teaches the processing unit is configured to process the image data to detect the one or more target gases (Paragraph 38 - The processor 260 may be used to run infrared imaging data processing applications.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Regarding claim 6, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson further teaches wherein the plurality of gas detection systems comprises one or more portable gas detection systems, the one or more portable gas detection systems configured to be worn or carried by a person (Paragraph 27- The users 120A-N may each wear a gas detection and locating device, such as a badge or tag, which may include a sensor for monitoring the exposure of the users 120A-N to the hazardous materials, such as hazardous gases or chemical compounds. ).
Johnson does not teach IR imaging systems.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Regarding claim 9, Johnson in view of Shmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson further teaches wherein each gas detection system comprises a communications module configured to communicate with the central server (The interface may transmit data describing the amount of hazardous gas a user A 120A has been exposed to, and the location of the user A 120A, to a central server. The hazardous gas exposure and location data of the user A 120A may be transmitted to the central server on a periodic basis, such as every minute.).
Johnson does not teach IR imaging systems.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 20110037599 A1; February 17, 2011) in view of Schmidt (US 2010/0127173 A1; May 27, 2010) in view of Bodkin (US 2010/0328659 A1; December 30, 2010).
Regarding claim 4, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson does not teach wherein each IR imaging system comprises an optical system comprising an optical focal plane array (FPA) unit, wherein the optical system comprising component defining at least two optical channels thereof, the at least two optical channels being least two optical channels positioned to transfer IR radiation incident on the optical system towards the optical FPA unit.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Johnson in view of Schmidt does not teach wherein each IR imaging system comprises an optical system comprising an optical focal plane array (FPA) unit, wherein the optical system comprising component defining at least two optical channels thereof, the at least two optical channels being least two optical channels positioned to transfer IR radiation incident on the optical system towards the optical FPA unit
Bodkin teaches wherein each IR imaging system comprises an optical system comprising an optical focal plane array (FPA) unit (Figure 1 Element 114), wherein the optical system comprising component defining at least two optical channels thereof (Paragraph 43 - Collimating lens 108, dispersive element 110, and focusing lens 112 may be used in conjunction with slit array 1702 to disperse and refocus multiple channels into multiple spectral signatures on focal plane array 114.)., the at least two optical channels being least two optical channels positioned to transfer IR radiation incident on the optical system towards the optical FPA unit (Paragraph 43 - Collimating lens 108, dispersive element 110, and focusing lens 112 may be used in conjunction with slit array 1702 to disperse and refocus multiple channels into multiple spectral signatures on focal plane array 114.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson in view of Schmidt with the channel of Bodkin. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since it allows for a compact device that is suitable for hand-held and vehicle application or moveable platform with increased imaging resolution.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 20110037599 A1; February 17, 2011) in view of Schmidt (US 2010/0127173 A1; May 27, 2010) in view of Rekunyk (US 5,742,053; April 21, 1998).
Regarding claim 7, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson does not teach wherein the plurality of IR imaging systems comprises one or more truck-based IR imaging systems and wherein the one or more truck-based IR imaging systems configured to be mounted to a truck.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Johnson in view of Schmidt does not teach wherein the plurality of IR imaging systems comprises one or more truck-based IR imaging systems and wherein the one or more truck-based IR imaging systems configured to be mounted to a truck.
Rekunyk teaches wherein the plurality of IR imaging systems comprises one or more truck-based IR imaging systems and wherein the one or more truck-based IR imaging systems configured to be mounted to a truck. (Column 4 Lines 59-65 - A further embodiment of the invention is illustrated in FIG. 4 in which a ground based moving platform, namely a truck or vehicle generally illustrated at 51, has the infrared detection system generally illustrated at 52 mounted on the forward end of the vehicle 51.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson in view of Schmidt with the truck mounting of Rekunyk. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this in order to allow for safe and accurate IR imaging of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Regarding claim 8, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson does not teach wherein the plurality of IR imaging systems comprises one or more aerial IR imaging systems and wherein the one or more aerial IR imaging systems configured to be mounted to an aerial platform.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Johnson in view of Schmidt does not teach wherein the plurality of IR imaging systems comprises one or more aerial IR imaging systems and wherein the one or more aerial IR imaging systems configured to be mounted to an aerial platform.
Rekunyk teaches wherein the plurality of IR imaging systems comprises one or more aerial IR imaging systems and wherein the one or more aerial IR imaging systems configured to be mounted to an aerial platform. (Column 2 Lines 50-55 - The infrared sensor and locator system is generally illustrated at 10 in FIG. 1. It comprises an infrared transmitter 11 and an infrared receiver 12, each of the receiver 12 and transmitter 11 being mounted on an airborne platform conveniently in the form of a helicopter 13.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson in view of Schmidt with the aerial mounting of Rekunyk. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this in order to allow for safe and accurate IR imaging of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 20110037599 A1; February 17, 2011) in view of Schmidt (US 2010/0127173 A1; May 27, 2010) in view of Syllaios (US 2007/0170359 A1; July 26, 2007).
Regarding claim 10, Johnson in view of Schmidt teaches the system of claim 1. Johnson does not teach wherein each IR imaging system comprises a spectral shutter.
Schmidt teaches IR imaging systems. (Paragraph 23- The infrared camera 110 can be placed in a fixed location to take images of the same scene periodically. In some embodiments, the infrared camera 110 can be used to scan one or more areas periodically.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since the use of IR imaging is a known manner of efficient and accurate detection of a potentially dangerous gas leak.
Johnson in view of Schmidt does not teach wherein each IR imaging system comprises a spectral shutter.
Syllaios teaches wherein each IR imaging system comprises a spectral shutter. (Paragraph 104 - However, as shown in the exemplary embodiments of FIGS. 16 and 17, a shutter and/or chopper may be provided to at least partially correct drift in infrared FPA offsets.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation monitoring system of Johnson with the infrared imaging of Schmidt. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this since it is a known method to correct drift in infrared FPA imagers thereby allowing for increase detection accuracy.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20060072109 A1 multiple channels are dispersed into multiple spectral signatures and observed on a two-dimensional focal plane array in real time.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GISSELLE GUTIERREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4672. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GISSELLE GUTIERREZ/
Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
